> Wikipedia is largely self-correcting in that the more eyeballs an article has, the more likely that wrong or biased claims will be challenged. I think that c

> Wikipedia is largely self-correcting in that the more eyeballs an article has, the more likely that wrong or biased claims will be challenged. I think that concept is a fairy tale. It's kind of like open source software: just because the code is out there doesn't mean anyone's looking for bugs in or or fixing them. Wikipedia articles settle on the stalemate between its most obsessive or motivated users, the result of which is frequently is wrong or biased. The quantity of eyeballs is irrelevant.